1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff purchased on August 4, 1990 and completed the registration of ownership transfer on August 29, 1990 the Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government 43 square meters (hereinafter “Plaintiff’s land”) and above ground buildings (hereinafter “Plaintiff’s building”). The Defendant is the owner of Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan 5.6 square meters (hereinafter “Defendant’s land”) adjacent to the Plaintiff’s land.

B. According to the survey and appraisal conducted on October 1, 2014, the boundary between the Plaintiff’s land and the Defendant’s land is identical with the indication of the attached drawing. The Plaintiff’s building is a brick sloping roof of the total floor area of 40.9 square meters and a part of the site was connected in order to each point of the attached drawing Nos. 1, 8, 6, 9, and 1 among the Defendant’s land.

C. Meanwhile, in the title section of the register of real estate register on the Plaintiff’s building, the content of the building is indicated as 19.83 square meters per 1,00 square meters per 19.83 square meters per 19.83 square meters per 19.83 square meters per 19.83 square meters per

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1 through Gap 3, Eul 1, Gap 5's images, the result of the survey and appraisal conducted by appraiser D, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. The plaintiff's assertion is that the acquisition by prescription has been completed by occupying part of the land of this case, which is part of the defendant's land, in a peaceful and openly performing with the intention to own it for twenty (20) years from August 29, 190 after purchasing the plaintiff's land and building, and the defendant is obligated to implement the registration procedure for transfer of ownership on the ground of completion of the acquisition by prescription on August 29, 2010. Accordingly, the defendant asserts that the plaintiff is deemed to possess the part of this case's land through reconstruction of the building after purchasing and moving the plaintiff's land and building. Thus, it is apparent that the commencement date of possession is unclear and it constitutes an unauthorized

B. According to the facts based on the judgment, the Plaintiff.